Ausrotten Definition (2/2)
Jamie McCarthy
Continuing the discussion on germanica-l, the first part of which was
posted in "Ausrotten Definition (1/2)".
Subject: 10- Re: The Himmler speech translation
Sent: 4/5/96 11:32 PM
Received: 4/6/96 11:39 AM
From: Bjorn Conrad, be...@erols.com
To: germa...@netcom.com
Jamie,
-- I haven't forgotten about your Himmler speech/ translation post!
It's just that I need a bit more time to put things together.
(... and sorry about the name screw up. It was an honest mistake)
The defense of your position was impressive, as far as it goes! I just
wish I had some of those billions for resourses, databases, and
facilities, to back up where I'm coming from too. I think that I
understand a bit better now how Clark and Darden felt during the OJ
Simpson trial. But alas, that is the lot of the militarily defeated
and ongoingly bio-culturally beleaguered and deliberately handicapped;
in a clearly unjust world of the victors making. Feel fortunate, while
you can, that you are not among the underdogs.
All I have going for me is some good sense, some invaluable linguistic
experience, and that ever more critical, skepticism. German is my
first language! But, I did, for the most part, grow up in this
country. My primary education was all in German. My High School
education was half-and-half. My higher education took place at
American Universities, in English obviously, as did my post graduate
work. I spoke German at home much of the time. I also lived in Germany
and in virtually all German speaking environments for over 5 years.
Well, I'm about as close to being a native speaker as you can get
while unquestionably being a native American English speaker.
Let me just say this about what you wrote and or dug out of your
database. If language were a mathematical formula, a cut and dry
proposition, something without room for interpretation, without
ambiguities, symbolism, figurative imagery, if it always translates
well, without often significantly different connotations for different
people at different times, I would concede this issue. But, obviously
it isn't.
I would appreciate it if you could briefly answer the following
questions honestly so that I can determine a bit better where you're
coming from and what I'm otherwise actually dealing with. This is just
my sincere first step in formulating a serious and thorough response
to the position you've taken. I'm sure we wouldn't want to waste each
other's time just because we neglected to initially qualify or
sufficiently explain our positions.
A FEW CRITICAL QUESTIONS FOR JAMIE
*To whom was the speech addressed?
-Soldiers, the public, political party members ...?
*On what occasion?
-A weekly or monthly event, in response to something ... ?
*Would it be too much to ask to have you also include the German
transcript of the paragraph before and after the one in question?
-I know you transcribed it, because that would have been the
minimum requirement to correctly understand the context.
*Would you categorically contend that your translation is totally
fair, objective, and without bias?
-If no, how can you justify being unfair or unjust?
+When is it acceptable not to be?
*Is "exterminate" the only viable definition for "ausrotten?"
-If not, what other definition/s would be acceptable?
+... in German?
+... in English?
+Based on what criteria should one choose a definition?
-When is it permissible to use the term figuratively?
+How do you know how someone is using the term?
*Is "exterminate" a biblical term, the way "ausrotten" is?
-What are the implications of this distinction, if there is any?
*Has the meaning of "ausrotten" changed over the last 60 years?
-If so, how and why?
-Has/have the English definition/s changed also in this century?
*Does "ausrotten" mean the same thing to all German speakers?
-Do people who work in different disciplines view the word
differently?
+Which disciplines might this involve, if any?
*Are there any sayings or expressions that include "ausrotten?"
-If so, what are they?
+How would they affect the interpretation of the word?
I'm awaiting your answers with considerable anticipation. Any additional
comments are of course welcome as well.
--------------------------------------------------------
"He who will not reason is a bigot; he who cannot is
a fool; and he who dares not is a slave."
(Sir William Drummond, 1585-1649)
---------------------------------------------------------
"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility
of servitude greater than the animating contest for
freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your
counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand
that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."
Samuel Adams
---------------------------------------------------------
Bjorn Conrad
Subject: Re: 10- Re: The Himmler speech translation
Sent: 4/6/96 2:13 PM
Received: 4/7/96 12:06 AM
From: Jamie McCarthy, ja...@voyager.net
To: germa...@netcom.com
CC: Bjorn Conrad, be...@erols.com
By the way --
Part of the reason I'm going into such detail about the word
"ausrotten" is that I realize that this mailing list is likely to have
a high density of readers who are fluent in both German and English.
I welcome contributions to the discussion from _any_ such reader. As
I've said, I'm not fluent, and part of how I learn is to solicit
opinions from anyone who is.
>Jamie,
>
>-- I haven't forgotten about your Himmler speech/ translation post! It's
>just that I need a bit more time to put things together.
>
>(... and sorry about the name screw up. It was an honest mistake)
No problem, apology accepted.
>The defense of your position was impressive, as far as it goes! I just wish
>I had some of those billions for resourses, databases, and facilities, to
>back up where I'm coming from too. I think that I understand a bit better
>now how Clark and Darden felt during the OJ Simpson trial.
I won't take this as a personal attack. I'll just point out that I
have never seen one dime of whichever "billions" you happen to refer
to. Ninety percent of the research I've presented was done by me. The
rest was offered by other posters to alt.revisionism. And I've
engaged in email discussions with a handful of native speakers and
linguists for advice. That's it.
My "resources, databases, and facilities" consisted of my visiting my
two local university libraries, and making photocopies of every German
dictionary they had. In my spare time.
I did the work, and I paid my own parking tickets too!
>All I have going for me is some good sense, some invaluable linguistic
>experience, and that ever more critical, skepticism. German is my first
>language!
OK. Noted.
For the record, any knowledge I have of linguistics is entirely
self-taught; I find the subject fascinating but never got a chance to
study it, I'm afraid.
>Well, I'm about as close to being a native speaker as you can
>get while unquestionably being a native American English speaker.
Again, noted.
You are the first native German speaker who has challenged the meaning
of "ausrotten" in the context of living things. Even Fritz Berg, a
native speaker and a famous Holocaust-denier, didn't question its
meaning. David Irving, a non-native but extremely fluent speaker,
said, when pressed, "I agree, Himmler said that. He actually said
'We're wiping out the Jews. We're murdering them. We're killing
them.'"
I invite other native speakers to join in this discussion. The more
opinions on this subject I see, the better-educated I'll be.
>Let me just say this about what you wrote and or dug out of your database.
>If language were a mathematical formula, a cut and dry proposition,
>something without room for interpretation, without ambiguities, symbolism,
>figurative imagery, if it always translates well, without often
>significantly different connotations for different people at different
>times, I would concede this issue. But, obviously it isn't.
The fact is that I've presented evidence to show, prima facie, that
the meaning of Himmler's words is best translated as "the Jewish
people are being exterminated."
Your claim is that the word "ausrotten" is best translated as
something else, i.e. "uproot" -- or at least your claim is that there
is sufficient ambiguity that it is impossible to tell what Himmler's
meaning was.
I have refuted that claim by citing several thorough dictionaries
which make it plain that "uproot" is only a valid translation when the
subject of that uproot actually has physical roots -- i.e. when it is
a plant.
When referring to abstract concepts, e.g. evil or immorality, it is
best translated "extirpate" or something like "vigorously eliminate."
Alternatives are "stamp out," "root out," or "uproot."
When referring to plants, e.g. weeds, it is difficult to translate but
a good possibility might be "vigorously rip from the earth." There
isn't a good English equivalent for "mit Stumpf und Stiel" --
uprooting something "root and branch" doesn't mean much to English
speakers, or at least not to this English speaker.
When referring to all living things, e.g. people, wolves, _a_ people,
a race, and incidentally including plants, it is best translated
"completely annihilate" or "exterminate." Good alternatives include
"destroy," "wipe out" and "kill off."
One native speaker put it to me picturesquely. He said that saying he
would go out into his garden and "ausrotten the weeds" would be like
saying, in English, "I will descend into my garden like the wrath of
heaven and completely annihilate the hellspawn weeds!" I suspect he
was exaggerating a bit to make a point. I take his meaning to be that
the simple word "uproot" is not a clear translation -- that the
important element is the complete destruction of the direct object.
To specify the complete destruction of plants, you say that they are
not merely broken off or chopped down, but rather pulled up whole,
roots and all.
Again, I ask native German speakers to help me out here. The more
opinions I get on this subject, the happier I'll be.
>I would appreciate it if you could briefly answer the following
>questions honestly so that I can determine a bit better where you're
>coming from and what I'm otherwise actually dealing with. This is just
>my sincere first step in formulating a serious and thorough response to
>the position you've taken. I'm sure we wouldn't want to waste each other's
>time just because we neglected to initially qualify or sufficiently explain
>our positions.
OK...
>A FEW CRITICAL QUESTIONS FOR JAMIE
>
> *To whom was the speech addressed?
> -Soldiers, the public, political party members ...?
The speech on October 4th, 1943 was addressed to SS-Gruppenfuehrers;
the speech on October 6th was addressed to Gauleiter. Attendence was
of course strictly regulated.
> *On what occasion?
> -A weekly or monthly event, in response to something ... ?
I don't believe it was in response to anything in particular; Himmler
gave many speeches and this was just one of them.
> *Would it be too much to ask to have you also include the German
> transcript of the paragraph before and after the one in question?
> -I know you transcribed it, because that would have been the
> minimum requirement to correctly understand the context.
Certainly -- they will follow shortly, in my next post to germanica-l.
> *Would you categorically contend that your translation is totally
> fair, objective, and without bias?
> -If no, how can you justify being unfair or unjust?
> +When is it acceptable not to be?
I am translating as honestly as I know how. My decisions are made by
consulting as many dictionaries and as many sources as I know how, and
by honestly analyzing them all.
I cannot claim to be free of bias; that is a decision for others to
make about me. I do claim to be acting as scientifically and
objectively as I know how.
> *Is "exterminate" the only viable definition for "ausrotten?"
> -If not, what other definition/s would be acceptable?
> +... in German?
> +... in English?
> +Based on what criteria should one choose a definition?
> -When is it permissible to use the term figuratively?
> +How do you know how someone is using the term?
I've gone into some detail above.
The criteria one should choose are the criteria that dictionaries
name. In this case that is the context, or, to be more specific, the
nature of the direct object of the verb. It is clearly spelled out in
the more-complete dictionaries that when the direct object is plants
or weeds, "uproot" may be an acceptable translation.
But when the direct object is Lebewesen[1], Volk[2,3,4,6],
Rasse[4,5,7], Tierrasse[6], race[7], Volksstaemme[8], or Woelfe[8],
the meaning is voellig und fuer immer vernichten[1], alle toeten[1],
exterminate[2,3,4,7,8], wipe out[3,4,5,7], extirpate[4,7],
annihilate[6], do away with[6], kill everyone[6], destroy[7]. Those
are _all_ the meanings given for those classes of direct objects -- I
am not leaving anything out. You'll notice that "uproot" and "root
out" are _not_ in the list of possible meanings.
1. Brockhaus Wahrig 1980.
2. Langenscheidt Compact 1989 (my bookshelf dictionary).
3. Langenscheidt Pocket 1981.
4. Muret-Sanders 1974.
5. Wildhagen 1972.
6. Wahrig 1967.
7. Harrap 1963.
8. Muret-Sanders 1906.
As for what you mean by "figuratively," you'll have to be a little
more explicit. If I understand correctly, "uproot," the original
meaning, would linguistically be considered the eigentlich (concrete?)
meaning, and application of that meaning to objects that do not
actually have roots would be the bildlich (figurative?) meaning.
After Luther introduced the word into the German language, the
original meaning of "pull [a plant] up by the roots" has entirely
faded away and has been replaced by a related meaning that I might
phrase as "destroy down to the last speck."
Now, I _believe_ that would be called the "figurative" meaning from a
strict etymological point of view, but I'm hampered by (1) not knowing
how linguistic German terms like "bildlich" are used, and (2) not
knowing if the term "bildlich" should still be used when the original
"eigentlich" meaning was obsolete centuries ago.
My _guess_ would be that, since the word's meaning has remained
unchanged for so long, the term "figurative" or "bildlich" would
nowadays be reserved for an exaggerated use of the word, where its
meaning was not actually intended. I assume this is the sense in
which you questioned me about its "figurative" usage.
Again, if any German linguists are reading this, I cordially request
assistance.
> *Is "exterminate" a biblical term, the way "ausrotten" is?
> -What are the implications of this distinction, if there is any?
Um...no, "exterminate" is not particularly associated with the Bible.
There are many possible translations into English, some of which have
Biblical associations, some of which do not. It doesn't really matter
when all of them mean, in the final analysis, "kill."
Here is what Ulrich Roessler (a native German speaker) wrote in 1994
about the original meaning which Luther brought to the word:
Richard Schulz posted some extract from the Grimms about 'ausrotten'
(From the first volume (not yet revised unfortunately), printed in
1854.) demonstrating the usage of the word 'ausrotten', which is
basically fixed for five hundred years. Wherever it is used it means
'to destroy completely', _exstirpare_:
Here only one example:
Luther: bis er ausrottet alles was mansbilde war in Edom. 1 koen.
11,16
Revised English Bible: until he had slain every male in Edom. 1
kings 11,16
> *Has the meaning of "ausrotten" changed over the last 60 years?
> -If so, how and why?
> -Has/have the English definition/s changed also in this century?
I already answered that one (and gave two good examples). No, the
meaning of "ausrotten" has remained constant for roughly the last five
centuries. And the English words offered in translation have not
changed either, to my knowledge.
Language evolution is very slow, except for slang, and one isn't
likely to see changes in these sorts of words over time periods as
short as sixty years. "Groovy" may change meaning. "Exterminate"
will not.
> *Does "ausrotten" mean the same thing to all German speakers?
> -Do people who work in different disciplines view the word
> differently?
> +Which disciplines might this involve, if any?
I cannot answer this; I leave it up to you.
> *Are there any sayings or expressions that include "ausrotten?"
> -If so, what are they?
> +How would they affect the interpretation of the word?
None that I have seen in any dictionary. If you know any, feel free
to explain.
>I'm awaiting your answers with considerable anticipation. Any additional
>comments are of course welcome as well.
Thank you.
--
Jamie McCarthy http://www.absence.prismatix.com/jamie/
ja...@voyager.net Co-Webmaster of http://www.almanac.bc.ca/
Unless you specify otherwise, I assume pro-"revisionism" email
to be in the public domain. I speak only for myself.
Posted; emailed to Jean-Francois Beaulieu and Bjorn Conrad.
--
Jamie McCarthy http://www.absence.prismatix.com/jamie/
ja...@voyager.net Co-Webmaster of http://www.almanac.bc.ca/
Unless you specify otherwise, I assume pro-"revisionism" email
to be in the public domain. I speak only for myself.
stud-mailer.uni-marburg.de
ja...@voyager.net (Jamie McCarthy) quoted some moron:
> *Has the meaning of "ausrotten" changed over the last 60 years?
No
> *Does "ausrotten" mean the same thing to all German speakers?
Yes
> -Do people who work in different disciplines view the word
> differently?
No
"Ausrotten" can obviously be used in a metaphoric way as it is possible with "to kill".
But when you speak of people, the meaning is clear the same way it is with "to kill".
Nele